Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Greg Brockman interview [video]

fs.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 276 posts

Re: Greg Brockman interview [video]

#201

Post by nl »

estearum wrote: post #179
ralph84 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walt Disney died 60 years ago. We don't need to incentivize him to do anything.

Are you arguing that copyright lasts too long or that copyright shouldn't exist? Your prior comment, "human culture is owned by humanity", sure sounds like the latter.

I think copyright is a valid incentive.

I don't think reading books (whether by human or by machine) is copyright infringement.

I think that attaining books that are still under copyright by downloading a pirate torrent is wrong.

I think a machine reading those books by borrowing them from a public library is fine.

I think copyright holders restricting their books from being in a public library is just as wrong as downloading a pirated copy.

I think deliberately reproducing a copyrighted book is wrong, but the infringement is by the person who did that, not by the person who built a tool which can incidentally be used for that.

Re: Greg Brockman interview [video]

#202

Post by gambiting »

avazhi wrote: post #191
wahnfrieden wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musk engineered the deaths of 14 million people https://time.com/article/2026/05/15/usaid-shutdown-rise-glob...

Yeah bro, the US pulling foreign aid is directly causative of somebody starving to death. lol

I mean.....it takes only a very cursory look over the programmes that USAid provided to see that it's more than likely?

Re: Greg Brockman interview [video]

#203

Post by snihalani »

exfalso wrote: post #157
_zoltan_ wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Set up a nice investment vehicle with maybe 400m so I can get 1.6m in dividends a year which would be better enough to comfortably travel the world, have a private chef, someone who organized travel so I don't have to.. A nice 12 person yacht on the Mediterranean is 400k eur for 2 weeks (with staff) so I'd realize it's not enough and invest the rest so I could get comfy. Along the way help friends and family, pay off…

What's the point of that? That sounds like the most boring life. You want to rot away on a yacht? Private chef? Are you kidding? Help family? Sure, although you don't need that much money for that. Friends? Ehh not very smart, just think about the changes in the friendships' authenticity.

I am not sure the benefit comes from doing it. I find the optionality & the social security attractive

Re: Greg Brockman interview [video]

#205

Post by avazhi »

gambiting wrote: post #202
avazhi wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah bro, the US pulling foreign aid is directly causative of somebody starving to death. lol

I mean.....it takes only a very cursory look over the programmes that USAid provided to see that it's more than likely?

That isn’t how causation works.

By your logic you could argue that if anybody on this planet starves to death then Americans can be blamed and ‘engineered it’, since they had the economic means to prevent it. You’re essentially trying to argue that inaction is a positive act, which it is not as a matter of logic and law universally.

Your logic is laughable on its face, obviously.

Americans have no more duty to look after non-Americans than anybody else.

Re: Greg Brockman interview [video]

#206

Post by avazhi »

tomhow wrote: post #198
avazhi wrote: post #189

[flagged]

Please don’t post snarky, shallow dismissals on HN. It only serves to make the place seem miserable.

That quote of his is relevant for everything Brockman says. That’s the lens through which he views the world.

Also, this is not the first time I’ve seen HN staff inexplicably rush to defend Altman or Brockman - I wonder why that is. Maybe stick to being objective moderators instead of displaying blatant bias in favour of people previously associated with YC (or perhaps current YC investments). It’s actually laughable how hands off you guys are when it comes to outrageous or flippant comments about Trump or Jews, for example, but I’m getting an @ for literally quoting somebody.

Hands off is good, but at least be consistent.

Do better.

Re: Greg Brockman interview [video]

#207

Post by [deleted] »

granzymes wrote: post #152
dooglius wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The objectional part would be: - in 2019, OpenAI created a capped-profit subsidiary in order to attract funding from commercial entities Particularly if it creates a conflict of interest for anyone making decisions on behalf of the nonprofit

I'm curious why you think that creating a for-profit subsidiary is objectionable, since it is extremely common for large nonprofits. A good example for this forum would be Mozilla, but many more were mentioned during the trial. Also curious what conflicts of interest you have in mind.

[deleted]

Re: Greg Brockman interview [video]

#208

Post by bwhiting2356 »

mannanj wrote: post #197
bwhiting2356 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can something be both a bubble and also eradicate the middle class's ability to make a living? There are reasonable people making the case for both of these things, that investment in AI will fall flat and that AI will be too powerful. Coalition forces are pushing them together into an anti-AI camp, but there's a contradiction. Is it too powerful or not powerful enough?

It can represent a few peoples interests, who aren't middle class, and eradicate the middle class. AI can fall flat in its affect and benefit for most people, while helping a few people. It can thusly be powerful for a few people, and not powerful enough for most people. (I feel we may see special models that most people will never access, while a few get those most powerful models). Did that answer your questions an…

The parent comment referred to AI as a bubble, and what you're describing I would not call a bubble.

Re: Greg Brockman interview [video]

#209

Post by gambiting »

avazhi wrote: post #205
gambiting wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean.....it takes only a very cursory look over the programmes that USAid provided to see that it's more than likely?

That isn’t how causation works. By your logic you could argue that if anybody on this planet starves to death then Americans can be blamed and ‘engineered it’, since they had the economic means to prevent it. You’re essentially trying to argue that inaction is a positive act, which it is not as a matter of logic and law universally. Your logic is laughable on its face, obviously. Americans have no more duty to look a…

If I provide cancer drugs to someone, and then suddenly stop, am I to blame for them dying of cancer? That doesn't imply that I have a moral duty to provide the drugs. But if I am providing them and then withdraw them, then there is some responsibility on my part?

>>You’re essentially trying to argue that inaction is a positive act

You've assumed I have a certain position then argue against it, not against what I actually said.

>>Your logic is laughable on its face, obviously

HN has a higher level of discussion than this

Re: Greg Brockman interview [video]

#210

Post by YetAnotherNick »

rfv6723 wrote: post #163
YetAnotherNick wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they should have made the position clear to the public, or at the very least have some communication with the employees. It's not hard to say that they were against Sam for some particular reason, if they are firing him. At least if the reason is good that might have given them some credibility. And why did Ilya become Sam lover after 2 days?

The employees are on Sam's side. Employees works for money and Sam brought money in.

This is so obviously wrong I don't know how this theory got popular. OpenAI had everything from compute to brand name to contracts. Sam wasn't the reason the money was coming, employees and OpenAI were. Even if Sam bought them money, board could still tell the reason of firing Sam rather than keeping it a secret.

And why did Ilya flip? He doesn't have much to gain by being in non profit when he could get more money elsewhere.

Post reply on HN